Whatever.

Centripital force upon on a solid object spinning is the the object.

It is directly related to it's speed, which is created in this case by gearing.

The Centrifigal force of two objects of equal weight moving at different speeds is not the same.

The Centrifigal force of two objects of unequal weight moving at the same speed is not the same.

The amount of weight required to add to the slower moving object to make it's centripital force match the faster moving object (which is already heavier) would be substantial.

At 2.6:1, the clutch basket's additional weight would have to be larger than the flywheels centripital force (weight A+ by more than the existing weight of the flywheel.....which would make the metal clutch basket too big to fit inside the case.

where  is the centripetal acceleration. The direction of the force is toward the center of the circle in which the object is moving, or the osculating circle (the circle that best fits the local path of the object, if the path is not circular).[7] The speed in the formula is squared, so twice the speed needs four times the force. The inverse relationship with the radius of curvature shows that half the radial distance requires twice the force. This force is also sometimes written in terms of the angular velocity ω of the object about the center of the circle, related to the tangential velocity by the formula

I've tried steel baskets on two strokes (CR500) and it is no way similar to a 10oz flywheel. You barely notice it.

A 15oz flywheel weight is night and day.

The speed in the formula is squared, so twice the speed needs four times the force. The inverse relationship with the radius of curvature shows that half the radial distance requires twice the force. This force is also sometimes written in terms of the angular velocity ω of the object about the center of the circle, related to the tangential velocity by the formula

It's only 4 times as much if the speed was 2 and was increased to 4.  As the values get higher, the delta increases, e.g., 2 x 8 is 16, whereas 82 is 64, or eight times as much. Go to 16, and 162 is 256.  But you take the point correctly.

And the inertia force of a rotating object is always correctly referred to as angular momentum.

Centripital force upon on a solid object spinning is the the object.

It is directly related to it's speed, which is created in this case by gearing.

The Centrifigal force of two objects of equal weight moving at different speeds is not the same.

The Centrifigal force of two objects of unequal weight moving at the same speed is not the same.

The amount of weight required to add to the slower moving object to make it's centripital force match the faster moving object (which is already heavier) would be substantial.

At 2.6:1, the clutch basket's additional weight would have to be larger than the flywheels centripital force (weight A+ by more than the existing weight of the flywheel.....which would make the metal clutch basket too big to fit inside the case.

where  is the centripetal acceleration. The direction of the force is toward the center of the circle in which the object is moving, or the osculating circle (the circle that best fits the local path of the object, if the path is not circular).[7] The speed in the formula is squared, so twice the speed needs four times the force. The inverse relationship with the radius of curvature shows that half the radial distance requires twice the force. This force is also sometimes written in terms of the angular velocity ω of the object about the center of the circle, related to the tangential velocity by the formula

We are not talking about centrifugal force.   Centrifugal force has nothing to do with flywheel weights other than whether they explode or not.

We are talking about rotational momentum.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia

I've tried steel baskets on two strokes (CR500) and it is no way similar to a 10oz flywheel. You barely notice it.

A 15oz flywheel weight is night and day.

So that must mean that steel baskets won't work for any bike ?  Sheesh !

Do either of you even own a fuel injected Yamaha dirt bike ?

Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy

Do either of you even own a fuel injected Yamaha dirt bike ?

If that was a relevant question, I might answer it.  EFI has nothing whatever to do with drive train physics.

Centrifugal force has nothing to do with flywheel weights

Do either of you even own a fuel injected Yamaha dirt bike ?

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt".

— ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

Clearly some smart people here so can anyone tell me if someone makes a fww for the fx? I didn't see one from stealthy, I'm guessing that's why mlc guy posted the steel basket option.

Clearly some smart people here so can anyone tell me if someone makes a fww for the fx? I didn't see one from stealthy, I'm guessing that's why mlc guy posted the steel basket option.

There is likely no room as they come with a big one stock. I would imagine the steel clutch basket would help some. Just texted a girl that rides a KTM 350 with a heavy steel basket and she said it did help some.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt".

— ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

Maybe this will help you.  Centrifugal force is perpendicular to the circumference of a flywheel.  It pushes outward.  A force in that direction does nothing to move it along, keep it spinning.  Rotational momentum acts tangential to the circumference of a flywheel.  It keeps it moving.

Maybe this will help you.  Centrifugal force is perpendicular to the circumference of a flywheel.  It pushes outward.  A force in that direction does nothing to move it along, keep it spinning.  Rotational momentum acts tangential to the circumference of a flywheel.  It keeps it moving.

Nope. Doesn't help me.....with you.

Rotational momentum acts tangential to the circumference of a flywheel.  It keeps it moving.

That's angular momentum.  And you still don't get it.

Whatever.

The YZ450F is 25MM

Multiple Sources:

YZ450FX

Yamaha already tweaked the 2016 YZ450F’s chassis for better bump compliance by adjusting the fork offset to deliver more front-end feel and better turning stability and switching to frame spars that are 12mm wider at the swingarm pivot; the YZ450FX incorporates these changes as well.

Two different reviews that say different things. The post above was wrong about the 2016 YZ450F being 24. I don't understand why they would have a different offset then 25mm that the 2016 YZ450F has. 25mm should be more stable and 22mm would be better turning. Doesn't make since for it to have 22mm and two different parts compared to the F, but obviously it could be.

I looked up and compared the part numbers...2016 yz450f is 25mm offset and the 2016 yz450fx is 22mm offset.

I looked up and compared the part numbers...2016 yz450f is 25mm offset and the 2016 yz450fx is 22mm offset.

That is what I did as well, and I mis-typed when I said in my earlier post that the F model was 24mm, I meant 25mm.  If you look at the part numbers for the FX, it crosses to the same part as the 250FX and the 14-15 250F and 450F- http://www.partsfish.com/oemparts/p/yamaha/1sl-23435-00-00/crown-handle

I looked up and compared the part numbers...2016 yz450f is 25mm offset and the 2016 yz450fx is 22mm offset.

Smart move on Yamaha's part.  My WR steered much better and felt lighter with the 22mm TC than the stock 25mm TC.

I wonder how the 450FX handles compared to the 250FX.  My 250FX is outstanding.  My friend thinks it is better than his Sherco 300.  Surely some of the 250FX handling transferred to the 450FX ?

Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy

Just had to jump into this one.

KTM300 vs 450fx.... Yum
Had a 300 sold it the week after I got the 450fx. This is after I bought 1200 kit suspension for the 300, and many other toys for it. Yes its the tool of choice when the going gets rough.

However.... Lets talk about maintenance. I raced mine so yea it hit the ground a few times... A race. I calculated it cost me about 250\$ a race in parts to keep hammering that thing.

So far FX nothing after 18mo. Of torture. It needs the oil, air filter, strainer changed... It needs the suspension redone, it needs a valve tune, but you know what it fires everytime and runs like a daemon...

The 300... Jetting all the time.... ALL THE TIME.....1/2 the time it ran good. And by good I mean %80 as good as the FX.

Now there are times I miss the Billy goat of the 300... But then I get to an open section and grab as much throttle as I dare......

5 hours ago, xjhammer01 said:

Just had to jump into this one.

KTM300 vs 450fx.... Yum
Had a 300 sold it the week after I got the 450fx. This is after I bought 1200 kit suspension for the 300, and many other toys for it. Yes its the tool of choice when the going gets rough.

However.... Lets talk about maintenance. I raced mine so yea it hit the ground a few times... A race. I calculated it cost me about 250\$ a race in parts to keep hammering that thing.

So far FX nothing after 18mo. Of torture. It needs the oil, air filter, strainer changed... It needs the suspension redone, it needs a valve tune, but you know what it fires everytime and runs like a daemon...

The 300... Jetting all the time.... ALL THE TIME.....1/2 the time it ran good. And by good I mean %80 as good as the FX.

Now there are times I miss the Billy goat of the 300... But then I get to an open section and grab as much throttle as I dare......

I'm glad you posted your experience. I bought a KTM 300xc in May. I wish I would have waited and bought the FX. Time to dump the KTM and move on.